Personally I think this rant is just that ... a rant (no disrespect meant personally to you Steven, and my comments/opinions are more general as you are not the first to make posts like this). So this is my rant ... long and sour

With all the reviews available today, its so easy to see what you are getting yourself into, before buying a kit. Use them ... they are free and can help avoid situations like this.
Dragons instructions quality should not come as a shock to anybody today either ... just read any review on any subject. This issue is not unique to Dragon either. Their instructions are their fault and I do not understand why they do not listen more. I would guess it is to keep costs down that they do not have more pages and updated drawings rather than using recycled drawings. Plastic is probably not the costliest part of the kit ... the instructions probably cost just as much.
There is a reason for the high parts count ... moulding to this quality level is not easy, so parts needs to be broken down more .... to mould as one piece and reach this quality would mean a much more expensive process and would be a whole new thread regarding kit prices.
Modellers today are more demanding regarding quality of details ... workable suspensions are a good example of this and are nice when one wants to articulate the running gear for a diorama, or even for effect. Ive built a few kits where its possible to articulate the running gear, and not one of them has made it compulsory to have them as workable. If you want it straight and simple, just cement all workable items, solidly in place. We are fortunate to have a choice here. Many other kits have weak attachment points to keep them workable, and sometimes these need to be swapped out for metal to increase strength. This is something as a modeller you have to decide for yourself ... whether to keep it simple or go for the more advanced articulation.

I dont care more for DML than any other model brand, but is everything really their fault or unique to them? I admire their ambition to keep upping the quality of detail and engineering. I support that in whatever shape or form it comes in. They take a lot of flak for their part count and details, but it is we modellers who drive this. Many modellers prefer Tamiya for this reason ... lower part count and not so crazy with the engineering. This unfortunately can have problems with detail quality, but they usuaully pick subjects that maybe are easier to engineer. So we need to make a choice what is important to us ... easier kit to build, detail quality or a certain subject (which can lead to not having a choice of the first two options).

I do not know you or know what your experience of kits is, but I do not see this kit as anything unique in part counts or difficulty. Nearly all new releases today can be seen to be high-end models are are aimed at a more experienced modeller. I can imagine them being over-whelming for somebody who has not been building for long. Dragon are not alone here. Its true some kits will be better than others, and maybe this one does have its issues, but again is not really a unique problem.
A 99% unopened kit does not need to trashed or given away free. Sell it on, if you do not want to continue with it. There are many who will buy this at a reduced price. You obviously like the subject, but there are not many other choices if you want just this model. I dont know whether to advise you to continue or get rid, but this wont be the last time you meet issues like this.
So hopefully there is something here that helps explain why this can happen and how to avoid it in the future.

..and hopefully, Frank's well-considered response (above) will be the LAST comment in this rather strange thread?

i gave it to a church now i just hope it does not drive some poor child insane or make him do a drive by at dragon hq

Just one more thought on this subject. Battle damage or otherwise wrecked vehicles, more individual parts gives more options and realistic results.

If I had to explain what it's like building a dragon kit to a newby, I would liken it to building a grand piano from Ikea in flat pack form sans instructions - even though a beautiful object with magical potential can be created, very very few will achieve that magic! And those that do will be lauded by others for their tenacity and perseverance in the face of such unimaginable difficulty.

More parts means more bits to mess up. Where are all these superior dragon models anyways? Don't see too many probably because they end up in stashes never to be built due to their complexity !

Yeah I really really dislike dragon kits

much thanks for all your usefull input

Can't resist....
First, if you're not hopelessly OCD, then scale models are probably not for you. People who are hopelessly OCD relish such madman processes as, oh, making a hundred or so spent .50 cal links and spent cases to throw around the floor of a vehicle, or doing bolt heads from hex rods, or having to research and go find a real vehicle to see What the heck! Dragon was trying to illustrate but failed at miserably (I like their halftracks, so I research a LOT)..
So if you're NOT the kind of person who gets all tingly over opening a kit and finding utterly fiendish and inhuman fiddly little bits to toil endlessly over and numerous challenges of Gordian Knot hair pulling madness complexity, then I'd stay away from Dragon armor kits altogether. You simply do not appreciate the value of utter insanity.

A lot of exaggeration going on here,Dragon kits simply are not that bad.Most of my armor builds are Dragon kits,which were no big deal to build.They are more detailed then Tamiya kits,but if can build them,anybody could.Of course I have not built every kit they make,there probably are some clunkers,but don't be put off and imagine that every kit they make is bad.That being said I think they went overboard with this T-28 kit,probably over engineered,and it will prove a challenge.

I would like to add an "Amen, Brother" to Frank's observations, could not agree more.

I have found that after going all out to get a Dragon kit finished, it's almost like a vacation to build a Tamiya kit next. If I REALLY want a challenge, I'll pull out one of the kits from Russia or Poland from the stash and give it a go. Lots of flash; soft or no detail; thick, awkward sprue attachments; large gaps which may be the result of short shots or just poor engineering; yadda, yadda, yadda.

If any given project gets to be no fun anymore, it goes into a Plastic Shoe Box of Shame and transported to the Shelves of the Doomed, nevermore to be seen unless I need to get a part or two and I remember which box had what I think I need (I usually end up going through several boxes, shaking my head and muttering "I don't remember starting this, what the heck. . . oh, there it is . . . hmmm . . . more glue than plastic here, never mind . . . wonder what's in this one . . . "

A lot of DML bashing going on just because one modeler doesn't like to assemble multiple HVSS bogies! Maybe he can still find some Lindbergh or Aurora kits on ebay. They're real easy builds - low parts count - minimal to non-existant detail. In only a few minutes you can sit back and proudly admire your latest creation.

Too funny.

Some kits are a bit over-engineered but I feel it's the instructions that can make or break a kit. ESPECIALLY if it is an unfamiliar vehicle or subject matter.

Walk-arounds are the best savior IF that is available.










~ Jeff

Maybe an elderly gentleman at the church with LOTS of time on his hands gets the kit.










~ Jeff

I did a Dragon Pz.Kpfw. IV about 3 or 4 years ago, and while complex and having some very busy instructions pics, it was manageable. Have they gotten worse in the interim, or have they always been "bad" and I just never noticed it because of my newness to the hobby?

Giving away a $70.00 kit is unheard of. I'm even more determined to build mine now.

I think some members here would have made better use of it, even at half the cost.










~ Jeff

Well, in case it was missed, I love their kits. But I'm utterly mad.

I LOVE THE DRAGON! They make the best stuff.. If *PANZERS* are your thing (as they are my thing) they are simply unparalleled.
I understand they are not always the best for non German stuff, but who cares.
As for busy directions or over-engineered kits, try an AFV Club kit, for starters.
DRAGON RULES!

Oh, come on! Whatever happened to patience and developing real modelling skills? Try an ADV/AZIMUT or WESPE full resin kit sometime- You'll think your DRAGON T28 was sent to you from Heaven... What would you Pansies have thought of the ABSOLUTE $#!+ that we had to work with back in the 1950s, '60s, '70s, '80s and '90s? I can't believe the ladying about individual track guides, for Pete's sake! Back in the day, we were lucky to have rubber-band tracks that didn't disintegrate upon opening the damned box!!! An "advanced" kit had about 20 parts in the box. If you really want an eye-opener, get yourself a 1960s-vintage REVELL 1/40 Sherman- that's the kit you want to throw in the garbage once you've compared it to a supposedly "so-so" DRAGON M4. I get the impression that as time goes on, today's modellers want kits that will put themselves together just by shaking the box... Back in the '40s and '50s, you bought a STROMBECKER kit that gave you 3 or 4 wooden blocks that you then CARVED TO SHAPE as shown in a very crude 3/4 view drawing... Personally, I LOVE a lot of DRAGON's supposedly "inferior" stuff... You guys have NO CONCEPTION of how lucky we are today...

I AGREE WITH FRANK GLACKIN WHOLE-HEARTEDLY!!! You guys want all this complicated and over-engineered stuff and then you lady about having to deal with it... Sit down, take a deep breath and try again. If you have to, walk away from it for a while. Come back to it with a clean slate and you'll do just fine... I've run into LOADS OF PROBLEMS with models since 1958- just take it easy, and you'll enjoy your hobby a lot more in the long run. That's why I usually have about a half dozen different projects going at once. If I get frustrated, I just go onto something else for the time being. It may take me a month of Sundays to complete a model, but at least it get's completed.

try fixing the dragon DAK panzer iv e I believe #6264 that should keep you busy fixing the errors and looking for parts, it's probably easier to just buy the vorpanzer e but if you enjoy the challenge try that.

This is really funny! This guy is bashing DML for being overly complicated in 1/35, and I was doing some of my own bashing on another thread for DML overly-simplifying their new 1/72 kits.

Some posts are really funny...
What relation does it have if kits on the 60's or 70's -when I started with modelling-sickness- were crappy and demanded lots of work and effort to achieve a finde model?
That's almost the same than disqualifying someone because he said that the last Ford (or Chevy, for the case) has a not so great suspension or air conditioner, telling him that he must feel himself lucky about today's models, because on the "old days" cars lack of any of the current "luxury" details...

Or like saying "Hey, I got this paint for my house, and it does not cover enough surface as it was supposed to, but what the heck, I'm happy because its far better than the paints I used in my youth, or those my grandpa used..."

We are living today, with the current quality expectations,and talking about kits thas cost more than 50/60 bicks each. That's why customers have the right to claim for what they believe is the fair exchange for their money.

If anyone feels well about building a 60 dollar kit with a numbre of innaccuracies and/or lacking details, good for you. But I think you'll have not to get your taste as the only truth in modelling.

The past is the past, and today is today, with very different standards (and far more expensive kits)

Just another brick in the wall....

I gave mine away. Wait... I give them all away.

I do sort of wish though that posts like this one included the actual reasons for the modelers frustration. For example I can't see all that well close up now that I am older. It means using magnifying lens or such. That is not the fault of Dragon.

Jim

My point in this discussion is that WE ARE lucky to have all the high tech kits of today- they shouldn't be taken for granted. Even if one is confronted by a badly engineered kit, there's no reason why the problems couldn't be worked out with a little bit of thought and some patience. It's quite possible that the bean counters at DRAGON might have gotten into the act with the engineering department regarding cost overruns in the design phase of their T28 project? Bean counters can and will ruin anybody's day; The bean counters' jobs are to keep the cost of doing business as low as possible, so quality will inevitably suffer in the end... My point in comparing 1950s through 1990s models to what WE ARE EXTREMELY FORTUNATE to have here in the 21st Century, is entirely relevant to the discussion at hand; Some of the often frustrating DRAGON kits are STILL much better than the stuff we had to deal with years ago. I cannot stress the credo enough regarding difficult, badly engineered and frustrating kits: "ADAPT, OVERCOME and IMPROVISE"... I'm sure that you'll experience the rewards of some extra pride and a sense of accomplishment in your work after having successfully completed an especially recalcitrant project...

Hi, McKeever! There are A LOT of us out there that DO CARE about US and ALLIED Tanks, Softskins and GIs... Personally, I could care less about some of these ridiculously obscure, "only-one-ever-built" contraptions or "paper Panzers"... Don't take it as a "put-down"...

I dunno though how the comparison holds. I was building models in the 70's and the average tank kit had like what, 3 parts and some tracks? And information was less prevalent, so detailing was an awful lot less extensive than today. I'd also suggest that the state of the art for detailing was a lot less advanced as well. in other words, we tolerated a heck of a lot less accuracy back then, building kits that would be intolerable if they came out today. I remember when the 70's Tamiya 1/35th kits seemed like hyperdetailed masterpieces. . .

I'd also suggest its not out of bounds to expect a kit with vastly greater complexity than a kit from the 90's to have good fitting parts and usable instructions. Mind you, I am OK with buying kits that require some TLC and scratchbuilding and putty work but I reserve the right to complain a bit when a $70-100+ kit has glaring traps in the instructions, major pieces that don't fit, or PE that is both inaccurate and borderline impossible to use (Dragon T28, I'm looking at you. . .).